dlder

DCS looks awesome with Win11's capability to automatically apply HDR to any Dx11 game. But the thing is: can the monitor setup be changed, so that Windows only "sees" the main - HDR capable - screen? So that HDR only gets applied to that and not to the SDR-USB-LCDs I have for radar/MPD/TV/... ? I've already checked and Windows does recognize those displays as SDR only. But because the game outputs the main display along side the exported ones, auto-hdr gets applied to the entire thing (main + MPDs), rather then only the main display. Hope you'll get what I'm trying to say I've tried to make pictures with my phones camera; it's not quite what it looks like in reality (it's even more white, but the camera doesn't pick that up), but one can see the white crosshair in the SDR shot, but not in the Auto-HDR one: SDR: HDR: PS: the problem lies in that the USB displays get a way too bright image and especially with Flir / TV images it's all pretty much white-on-white...

I know, it's just a little thing but it's an inconvenience never the less (and one that seems easy to fix). Pressing "B" enables Airbrakes, but pressing B again doesn't disable them. You have to press B a 2nd time. The direct key presses for "Airbrake on" (LShift+B) and "Airbrake off" (LCtrl+B) work. I'm on latest stable.

Wow, what an epic post, ty!!

I just now realized, there is v1.6 of your mod... gotta try it next. Also curious about the MSIP mod^^

That would be awesome In here or PM ?

The two AMRAAM defined in "DCSWorld\CoreMods\aircraft\AircraftWeaponPack\aim120_family.lua" can be used and work. Of course. But if I use the code for those missiles in my own mod, I have to at least change the following code: wsTypeOfWeapon = {wsType_Weapon,wsType_Missile,wsType_AA_Missile,AIM_120C}, to wsTypeOfWeapon = {wsType_Weapon,wsType_Missile,wsType_AA_Missile,WSTYPE_PLACEHOLDER}, or else, DCS hangs when starting with the following error message: Now, with this change, the mod works; I cannot equip the new missile directly, as I have no access to the F-15C.lua, where the pylons and respective payload-IDs are defined, but I can equip them via UnitPayloads just fine. So I have the 120C on my own racks mounted on the pylons and can use them. BUT, as I had to figure out the hard way by testing it... the missiles don't track. Or at least not really. One might get lucky if the enemy doesn't move from it's path, or if you shoot the missile inside about 10nmi. But mostly the missiles defined by me don't kill any enemy, but the default still does (same ranges, same enemy, .... etc. -> I can provide Tacview if needed) => my conclusion is this: the plane (or radar) needs to "know the missile" to work correctly! (it's the same as mounting the Aim-54 onto the F-15C which works, but only STT and also has not a perfect tracking) -> that's why the Modern Missiles mod works, as it overwrites the (performance) data of existing missiles (120D -> 120B), so the missile ID is the same! Now to my questions: Is my assumption correct? I'm very sure, as I've tested it extensively, but it just sounds so... weird How can I access the "F-15C" aircraft files, to (a) add the new IDs to the pylons and (b) to add the new missiles to the radar (I guess?)? How can I use the default missiles in my mod? if I change the code in the "aim120_family.lua" from local AIM_120C = to AIM_120C = one might think I can just access that variable like so: local F15_aim120c5_AA = AIM_120C declare_weapon(F15_aim120c5_AA) But that doesn't work. DCS starts but logs the following error and my modded missile isn't available: What I did instead: I used the new rack shape and defined the new shape+missile ID in the default "aim120_family.lua". So, I basically used the same code as I did in the "mod", but now inside the default file using the default missile definition and it works! Credits: I've used the "Modern Missile Mod", as well as the AMBER rack from the awesome "F-15EX Mod" (which unfortunately is using older code, thus the F-15E seems to be underpowered and it's radar is definitely worse then the default F-15C. The used missile code too is old and the included 120C-7 has a smaller range the the DCS default 120C-5) Because of that, I don't think I'm allowed to distribute this... null _Test5 - 120c 2x def, 2x amber - 4x hit (rack definition in aim120_family.lua).acmi _Test5 - 120d 2x def, 2x amber - 4x hit (rack definition in aim120_family.lua).acmi _Test2 - 2x 120C default + 2x 120C amber (hit, hit, miss, miss).acmi _Test2 - 2x 120D default + 2x 120D amber (hit, hit, miss, miss).acmi _Test3 - 1x def, 2x amber, 1x def (hit, miss, hit, hit).acmi _Test4 - 2x amber, 2x default (miss, miss, hit, hit).acmi

Yep, that's what I meant^^ Thanks!!

Sorry for being unclear! I meant, does the WinWing have such buttons or is it "software" (if axis = 0%, throw virtual button) (I know Virpil is only Virtual) Cheers!

Thanks for your answer; is this a "dedicated button" at zero on the throttle, or is it a "hack", like which can be done on the Virpil throttle: change Axis to Buttons set range A (12 - x %) to a button set range B (x - 0%) to button map those ingame to Throttle Idle / Throttle Off-Idle

I've heard the Warthog throttle has a button at the 0 throttle position. I can't find any information if any of the more modern ones have that neat feature too? Like WinWing or Virpil Throttles? Thanks!

Does this post get updated if/when a fix is available? Just wanna make sure following this thread will be beneficial^^ Thanks!

Ever since the update, the mirrors in the Su25 and Su27 (these are the ones I tried as of yet), are partly fuzzy with a "border" running through the mirror where the other side looks normal / sharp. I've tried checking the Steam files (I'm on stable), clearing any (shader) caches (in the dcs profile folder). Nothing helps. Here are some screenshots (with red lines showing the border):

Yeah, I too was thinking that maybe DCS might allow for better MFD export configuration; but I'm not sure if/how one could utilize these. When I enable one of my MFDs the "windowPlacement" stays the same as before, and the new "monitors" variable has 2 entries (for 2 monitors) windowPlacement = { ["y"] = 0, ["x"] = 0, ["w"] = 4240, ["h"] = 1440, } -- added with DCS 2.8 and auto-generated: monitors = { [1] = { ["rcMonitor"] = { ["top"] = 0, ["right"] = 3440, ["left"] = 0, ["bottom"] = 1440, }, ["dwFlags"] = 1, ["rcWork"] = { ["top"] = 0, ["right"] = 3440, ["left"] = 0, ["bottom"] = 1400, }, }, [2] = { ["rcMonitor"] = { ["top"] = 0, ["right"] = 4240, ["left"] = 3440, ["bottom"] = 600, }, ["dwFlags"] = 0, ["rcWork"] = { ["top"] = 0, ["right"] = 4240, ["left"] = 3440, ["bottom"] = 600, }, }, } The values from the 2nd are from the 800x600 MFD display. But this is currently configured inside the "monitorsetup" LUAs. I haven't figured out how to use these new variables for or instead of the multimonitor LUA...

Can anyone tell me what these new settings do? Before 2.8.1 windowPlacement = { ["y"] = 0, ["x"] = 0, ["w"] = 3440, ["h"] = 1440, } After the update: windowPlacement = { ["y"] = 0, ["x"] = 0, ["w"] = 3440, ["h"] = 1440, } monitors = { [1] = { ["rcMonitor"] = { ["top"] = 0, ["right"] = 3440, ["left"] = 0, ["bottom"] = 1440, }, ["dwFlags"] = 1, ["rcWork"] = { ["top"] = 0, ["right"] = 3440, ["left"] = 0, ["bottom"] = 1400, }, }, } I ask, because I have different files for how many MFDs I'm running. So, if this code is needed or better yet: if I can use it for something specific, I'd like to know Thanks!

Yep, that's what I'm aiming for. Maybe it's still a bit too sharp (picture is still a bit grainy), but I'm getting there^^

I know this is the wrong thread... but here are some more comparison shots of default summer textures + default trees vs. default summer textures + better trees. DEFAULT BETTER DEFAULT BETTER DEFAULT BETTER DEFAULT BETTER

I use his trees now too; less flickering and way less pop-in. Just look at those super-low-poly trees from default (top left): And here's better trees v6 (medium): True, the colors now are different, but quite ok (not enough variation imho, but maybe that's coming in v7 or so^^)

I did, yeah. I have never been a fan of Reshade; it just changes the overal feel of games too much imho. But after seeing this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGxgD9GNVNw) and the crisp textures and clarity (like lifting a veil), I had to try it. So I've tinkered a bit with the settings (I didn't want to change the "warmth/colors" too much). I'm currently using my "optimal" profile, in where I follow the "less is more" approach. Not even setting clarity too much (as it makes the textures too crisp to look at). FakeHDR is also not really working (I have an 1000nits HDR monitor and know what it shoud look like^^). I've included my 3 profiles, BUT: everyone has to find his own settings! The good thing is: one can adjust the sliders and plugins on-the-fly ingame, which is a huge help setting it up. Hotshot_dark-crisp.ini Hotshot_optimal.ini Hotshot_dark.ini

Good question! I've updated the prices and included taxes; now the differences are really apparent! If I go the Virpil and not the WinWing route, I'll probably use their pedals. With WinWing, I'm gonna buy the Crosswind I guess. But I have to admit: I didn't yet watch/read any reviews of any of those pedals. Cheers!

That's gtk! I really have to be mindful about the width... Hm... don't you use the Joystick "brake axis" for that? Like WinWing F-16, Virpil Mongoos or Constellation (I'm gonna buy one of these in the near future). They have a brake lever like the MiG-29. Thanks! I'll give them a closer look

Thanks for all your input! Greatly appreciated! I guess I'll have to try it. I don't have a lot of space, but hopefully the dimensions are indicated on the product pages^^ Thrustmaster TPR 530€ MFG Crosswind 337€ VIRPIL ACE Collection Flight Rudder Pedals 420€ VKB T-RUDDER PEDALS MK.IV 215€ Slaw Device RX Viper V2 Rudder Pedals 600€ (incl. VAT, excl. shipping) Quite honestly, VKB's price looks okay'ish; 500 just for pedals... seems wild. But maybe it's a buy-once-cry-once kinda thing...

@Mustang Are those the only two files need (as linked by HawaiianRyan? There seems to be quite some optional stuff in the autoexec; also, the terrainoptions41.lua seems "old" (or too new; I'm still on 2.7) as they don't match quite significantly with the original file... Maybe you could clear up what you changed to get higher view distance?

If anyone is interested: I've made videos for all seasons for comparison: Default textures this + Hangars textures Max graphical settings, without Blur and DOF. Here's the Link: I've also made some pictures: https://stumpfl.lima-city.de/pictures/vergleich/index.php?dir=DCS+-+Textures I gotta say: playing the game with these textures is awesome! So much more detailed! The only negative thing I can say is, that all seasons look a bit too much alike and summer isn't "colorful" enough. Not green enough and no yellow wheat or corn fields. That's why I use the default summer textures. I do have to say though: the semi-winter textures (either as autumn or spring) look fantastic!! Cheers!

How do you get those module names? I've tried searching for "declare_plugin", which works for some/most, but for instance the Apache is listed as "AH-64D BLK.II AI"... Hm, I think I got it: search for "self_ID"

Well, it's not that hard to use the prefered files from each texture pack, but "overall palette", that really is what I'm concerned about. Thanks for your opinion. This is the way!